Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003

Beale v. Yepes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided October 27, 2003

309 A.D.2d 886; 766 N.Y.S.2d 364

Cases that cite this one

12 later published cases cite this decision.

Montague v. Rivera (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
Mora v. Scarpitta (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
Abrams v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
Torres v. Rely On Us, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
Wei Hong Hu v. Sadiqi (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Kossefis v. Law Office of Robert P. Tusa (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Canty v. Gregory (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Quintero v. Kim (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Desiderio v. Devani (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Huggins v. Parkset Supply, Ltd. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Lopez v. Tierney & Courtney Overhead Door Sales Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
Oyebola v. Makuch (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Glover, J.), dated September 9, 2002, which denied their motion to vacate an order of the same court, dated October 1, 2001, which granted the *887defendants’ motion for summary judgment upon the plaintiffs’ default in opposing the motion.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To vacate a default, a plaintiff must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious cause of action (see CPLR 5015 [a]; Sicari v Hung Yuen Wong, 286 AD2d 489 [2001]). The plaintiffs’ counsel’s bare allegations of law office failure on the part of prior counsel cannot serve as the basis to set aside a judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 (see Gourdet v Hershfeld, 277 AD2d 422 [2000]; Eretz Funding v Shalosh Assoc., 266 AD2d 184 [1999]; Spatz v Bajramoski, 214 AD2d 436 [1995]; Blackman v Blackman, 131 AD2d 801, 805 [1987]). Furthermore, the plaintiffs failed to submit any evidence sufficient to satisfy the serious injury threshold set forth in Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Sarot v Yusufov, 301 AD2d 512 [2003]; Waaland v Weiss, 228 AD2d 435 [1996]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the motion to vacate. Altman, J.P., S. Miller, McGinity, Adams and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.